Subject: Re: [PATCH] [Outreachy] patch-ids: fix const correctness

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 11:33:39 -0700

Okhuomon Ajayi <[email-masked]> writes:

> Thanks for explaining! I get it now the NEEDSWORK comment isn’t needed
> since the hashmap API is supposed to have cmpfn_data as const. I’ve
> removed the comment and didn’t change anything else

The NEEDSWORK comment is about going even further, starting from
question if hashmap should really be using "const" in the first
place, to sort things out among all the components involved
(including other users of the hashmap API).

A commit that does not do the necessary study and just removes the
needswork comment is simply irresponsible, no?